The Challenges of Analyzing Anesthesia Price Transparency Data

Healthcare price transparency has created new opportunities for providers, self-funded employers, and even biotech and life science companies to better understand how services are reimbursed. Payer Transparency in Coverage (TiC) files now publish millions of negotiated rates across every CPT, and many HCPCS and MS-DRG codes. For most services, this data can be used directly to benchmark commercial rates against Medicare or across payers. Anesthesia is different.

“Transparency data is necessary to start leveling the playing field between payors and providers.  You have to know it if you are going to be successful.
-Michael Bowe MBA, CMA VP Anesthesia Operations PBI Inc.

PBI is an established leader with 40 years of experience in providing medical billing services, with expertise in anesthesia revenue management.
‍

How Anesthesia Billing Works‍

‍Anesthesia services are not reimbursed as flat fees. Payment is calculated using a formula that combines multiple elements:

(Base Units + Time Units + Modifier Units) × Conversion Factor (CF)

Each component influences the final allowed amount:

• Base Units: Assigned by the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) to reflect procedure complexity. For example, anesthesia for a colonoscopy has 5 base units, while a hip replacement has 7. Not all payers use ASA units. Medicare and many BCBS plans apply their own methods.
  
  
• Time Units: Typically one unit per 15 minutes of anesthesia time, though some plans use 10-minute increments or special approaches (such as obstetrics). This means two patients with the same CPT code may generate different units depending on case length.
  
  
• Modifier Units: Adjustments applied for patient condition or staffing model. A physician-only service (AA) reimburses differently than a CRNA-directed service (QX/QZ). Physical status modifiers (P3–P5) may also add units, reflecting the patient’s preoperative condition.
  
  
• Conversion Factor (CF): The negotiated dollar amount paid per unit. Importantly, the CF itself varies by staffing modifier. For example, a physician-only service may have a higher CF than a CRNA-directed service under the same contract. Medicare updates its anesthesia CF annually, while commercial payers negotiate their own.
  
  

This structure makes anesthesia unique compared to other specialties. The allowed amount for the same CPT code can change dramatically based on case duration, staffing, and modifiers. For that reason, transparency data on anesthesia rates should not be benchmarked without careful context and assumptions.

What Price Transparency Data Shows and What It Does Not

TiC files publish negotiated allowed amounts by payer, plan, and provider. For anesthesia, these published amounts are not actual claim payments and do not include any utilization details. They represent only one part of the billing formula.

The files typically do not capture the full set of elements needed to calculate anesthesia reimbursement, such as case time, complete modifier combinations, or detailed staffing information. Without those factors, the published rate cannot be interpreted literally as what a provider receives for a given service. This is why anesthesia analysis in transparency data requires careful assumptions and often supplemental data.

* Many payers do publish anesthesia rates with modifiers (for example, AA, QX, P4), but reporting practices are inconsistent. Some carriers leave modifier fields blank even when modifier-specific rates exist in contracts. Others generate placeholder rows for every possible modifier combination, whether or not they are actually billable. In some cases, files may show a default “1 time unit” or partial modifier sets (such as physical status codes P3–P5), but these inclusions are uneven across payers.

The “Base Plus One” Proxy

Because data from the payer machine-readable files lacks time units, we normalize the data by assuming one time unit for every case. The formula then becomes:

Implied Conversion Factor = Negotiated Rate ÷ (Base Units + 1)

This creates a consistent baseline for comparison. The “plus one” reflects the fact that every anesthesia service has some duration, even if the exact number of time units is unknown.

For example, if the published rate for a colonoscopy (5 base units) is $480, dividing by 6 yields an implied conversion factor of $80 per unit. Medicare’s anesthesia CF in 2025 is $21.12, so this equates to about 3.8 times Medicare.

The purpose of this approach is not to identify an actual claim payment. Instead, it provides a way to benchmark across payers and procedures on a normalized basis.

That said, this analysis must be conducted carefully as several anesthesia codes don't include time units.
‍‍

Why the Data Looks Messy

When you calculate implied conversion factors across millions of rows, the results vary widely. This is not necessarily because anesthesia contracts are inconsistent, but because of quirks in how transparency data is published and how anesthesia is billed.

• Multiple plan types: A single provider may show dozens of rates for the same CPT because each product line (PPO, HMO, marketplace, ASO) publishes a different amount.
  
• Place of Service codes: Some rows include settings like office (POS 11), which are frequently not relevant for anesthesia. These often generate implausibly low implied conversion factors. (There are cases where POS 11 makes sense, for example at the dentist.)
  
• Modifiers: The files sometimes include rates tied to modifiers, such as CRNA-directed discounts, but without labeling them clearly.
  
• Zombie rates: Zero-dollar rows or placeholder entries appear even in otherwise clean files.
  
  

Each of these factors adds noise to the analysis. This is why careful filtering and thoughtful analysis is essential before drawing conclusions.

What the Data Can Reveal

Even with its imperfections, anesthesia price transparency data can provide valuable insights. When normalized and filtered, it helps stakeholders understand their relative market position.

It can show how commercial conversion factors compare to Medicare, highlight differences across payers, and identify where reimbursement levels are unusually low or high. For anesthesia groups negotiating with payers, this context is powerful. For consultants and self-funded employers, it offers visibility into one of the more opaque areas of reimbursement.

A carefully prepared analysis might reveal that one payer averages $72 per unit while another averages $55 in the same state. When benchmarked against Medicare’s $21.12 baseline, both are multiples of the government rate, but the difference between them is a strong talking point in contract negotiations.

How Gigasheet Supports Anesthesia Analysis

Working directly with TiC files can be overwhelming. They are massive, messy, and inconsistent across payers. For anesthesia in particular, it is not enough to just look up a CPT and its dollar value.

Gigasheet provides cleaned and filterable data services for anesthesia analysis. This includes:

• Pre-processing payer files to extract anesthesia CPT codes (00100–01999)
  
• Joining those codes to ASA base unit values
  
• Applying the “base plus one” normalization to calculate implied conversion factors
  
• Allowing users to filter by relevant place of service (inpatient, outpatient, ASC)
  
• Benchmarking commercial rates against the current Medicare anesthesia CF
  
  

The result is not a claims-ready fee schedule but a strategic reference point. It enables anesthesia groups, billing companies, and consultants to understand how their contracts compare in their market and to negotiate from a position of strength.

Balancing Potential with Caution

Anesthesia is one of the most challenging areas of price transparency data. The billing model is unique, and the files contain noise that can distort the picture if not handled carefully. At the same time, the potential is significant.

For the first time, providers and billing companies can compare conversion factors across payers and geographies using publicly available data. This offers leverage in negotiations and insight into market positioning that simply did not exist before.

The key is to recognize the limits. TiC data does not capture time units or modifiers, and it does not reflect the exact reimbursement of a specific claim. Used carefully, however, anesthesia transparency data becomes a powerful reference tool. It helps identify payer variation, establish a baseline against Medicare, and point toward areas where further investigation is warranted.

Handled thoughtfully, anesthesia price transparency data has the potential to reshape how providers, hospitals, and employers understand anesthesia reimbursement. The insights are real, but so are the caveats. Careful consideration is the difference between noise and strategy.

‍